Dear Editor,
Where is the Auditor General’s Report on the fabricated GMC Chicken Scandal? Recent events in the Parliament of Guyana have caused me to revisit the issue of the dangerous, scandalous, and libelous allegations carried in the Kaieteur and the Stabroek newspapers on September 12, 2024, to which I responded. To date, Kaieteur News has failed to publish my letter where I responded to those news articles to expose how these two newspapers breached basic journalistic ethics by publishing unverified, uncorroborated, lopsided, malicious talk as news from one source that is affiliated with one of them.
That news item stemmed from a dangerous and scandalous claim made by the general manager, Ms. Lall, of Guyana Marketing Corporation (GMC), who is also the daughter of the owner of Kaieteur News (KN), Glen Lall, who claimed that according to the SN report, “she noticed irregularities between the accountant and the special projects manager, so she launched an audit.” The KN noted that Lall asserted that “… during the internal audit, she identified significant irregularities and discrepancies involving the accountant and the Special Projects Manager.” In this KN news article, Lall also claimed that the Ministry of Agriculture’s statement on the issue contradicts her claims and is false, indicating that she, Ms. Lall, is probably the head of the ministry and not the minister.
I, therefore, wonder how! In my letter penned to these newspapers to comment about their unprofessional and abhorrent conduct in publishing such a libelous article, I mentioned that this attack on the character of innocent people, with clearly malicious and unfounded allegations, may have damning consequences on the people targeted in the news item. I fear that the continued assassination and damage to the professional character of the two GMC officers identified in the KN and SN September 12th articles continue to be realized even to date. So, in the just concluded parliamentary budget debate, my fear was confirmed.
Regarding that debate, I was directed to a speech made by an opposition member of parliament, Mr. Jordan, where he, unfortunately, resorted to the same kind of reckless action by KN and SN on the libelous and scandalous claims made by Ms. Lall against the accountant and another staff at GMC. I am unsure if the MP’s premature attack on the character of these public servants directly resulted from him reading the libelous news articles carried by two of the nation’s biggest newspapers or whether he might have had personal conversations with Ms. Lall concerning her fabrications. I wonder what constituted the basis for the M.P.’s attack on GMC’s accountant and special projects manager. The answer to this question would be sufficient to determine Mr. Jordan’s gravitas on the issue he purports to represent and his grasp of the responsibility of the office in which she serves.
Regardless of what influenced Mr. Jordan’s comments, it was clear that his responsibility to ensure due diligence on the issue was either advertently or recklessly ignored. Mr. Jordan failed to recognize that though his speeches in the parliament are protected due to the immunity privileges bestowed to him by his election to that August House, he must take care to ensure that his words and actions are not premised on false, incomplete, destructive, or malicious motives instituted by others or on their behalf. Did Mr. Jordan take some time to investigate this story?
If so, did he or his office contact any of the two officers he maligned in his speech to ascertain whether these people had a different story to tell? Did the M.P. try to get their view to determine whether their boss was merely attempting to hide her incompetence or abusing the office given to her by the president, whom she claims to be her friend, in 2020? Did Mr. Jordan consider how his brazen and ill-advised attempt to slander innocent people could have serious repercussions for the people who were the target of his claims?
Any reasonable, serious, mature, and capable politician would have regard to how their comments that attack private citizens, whether they work in public or private sector, can impact the lives of those people and their families. I once considered Mr. Jordan prudent; however, his recent remarks leave much to be desired. Politicians, especially those elected to such high office, are held to a higher standard than the regular John Doe. Those who hold such high public office are expected to be much more diligent, trustworthy, transparent, and prudent in their ways.
Their position as fiduciary officers of the people must result in bringing relief to people and not harming their character. Scholars and theorists who examined the value of political speeches made by politicians note that while these public statements can increase compassion and build citizens’ trust, they can also promote scorn and distrust. That distrust and scorn can be directed at innocent people who are objects of the politician’s utterances.
Theologians, philosophers, and scholars of almost every period of enlightenment, from Socrates to Confucius, emphasize the need for public office to embrace the Golden Rule, also known as the Principle of Reciprocity, also found in the Book of Matthew chapter 7, verse 12. That principle which U.S. Congressman Emanuel Cleaver (2016) notes that to practice that rule means that “… we are intentionally regulating our public conduct that we may not do or say anything that we don’t want done or said against us.”
I am sure Mr. Jordan would not want anyone to make false or unfounded allegations against him, especially at a forum as large as the Guyana Parliament. He should, therefore, ensure that he resists the temptation to substitute ego for due diligence, good ethics, and responsible conduct. Further, politicians and those who hold themselves out as leaders have a greater responsibility to ensure that their actions and words do not harm others.
As I watched the clip of the MP’s passionate, misguided posture, I noticed that the Speaker of the House invoked his authority and cautioned Mr. Jordan that what he was asserting were mere allegations. Yet, Mr. Jordan insisted on continuing his narrative on these two individuals. At some point, the Speaker should have instructed that Hansard should not reflect the allegations the MP referenced in his speech. To do this would ensure that the Speaker also uses the authority granted to him by the Commonwealth Parliamentary authority to regulate the conduct of parliament by protecting citizens from unfounded attacks just like he is to ensure that MPs’ speeches are protected.
I wondered why Mr. Jordan did not press the minister for the Auditor General’s report on this issue. I believe that line of questioning would have helped his case since the public was told many months ago that the bogus issue initiated by Ms. Lall was sent to the Auditor General’s Office for investigation. In my last letter to the press, some months ago, I enquired about this report as I eagerly await it to do my analysis. While we wait for this report, the Ministry of Agriculture has done nothing since its last statement many months ago to clear the air on this issue and reduce the harm to two of its current employees.
As I stated in my last letter, I know the accountant to be one of the most competent and professional in his field. This individual has managed budgets fifty times bigger than GMC and easily managed large, complicated private corporations. His accounting record is unblemished, and his managerial skills are incomparable. The minister’s response to Mr. Jordan’s question about the whereabouts of the two people he referenced in his speech also raised suspicion.
It is unclear whether the minister’s response to the M.P. was an agreement with the M.P. that the accountant was transferred or moved to another agency because of the allegation or whether it was as a result of some other reason. It is, therefore, incumbent on the minister to clarify what he meant in his response, as it fuels other speculations and would cause onlookers like me and possibly Mr. Jordan to raise other questions. So, will there be clarity, or will the issue continue to straddle the professional careers of the two people targeted in Ms. Lall’s libelous claims? Is Ms. Lall above the minister and the ministry? Will the ministry issue a statement to repair the reputation of two of its staff?
Unfortunately, the Ministry of Agriculture has not issued a forceful rebuttal to Ms. Lall’s lies. Is this because of her apparent close ties to the president? Had this been any other middle-level staff with no political ties, I am sure that person would have been fired for doing what Lall did, but when nepotism is the order, these things happen. So, will Ms. Lall, Kaieteur News, Stabroek News, and the leadership of the Ministry of Agriculture apologize to these two people for slandering and making libelous statements against them?
Or should they have to resort to the courts for justice? Mr. Jordan may not feel compelled to apologize because he understands that he is immune from prosecution for his words uttered within the confines of the parliament. However, I wait to see whether conscience and embracing the Golden Rule will outweigh the sense of might in the right politics. I restate my call for the Auditor General’s Report on this Lall Chicken Scandal.
The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) notes in its code of ethics that those in the business must verify information before publishing it and that inaccurate information that is published should be swiftly corrected and explained. Other ethical considerations for libelous publication include an apology to those harmed by the allegation to be published in a prominent section of the papers that published that allegation on the day the papers receive the most sales. The intent is to amplify the right as you did with the wrong. Vincent Bacote, professor of theology at the Center of Applied Christian Ethics, states, “We can pursue good without practicing “anything goes.” We can tell the truth about ourselves and others while making clear the reasons for our political aims.”
I close with Matthew 7:12: “Do for others what you would have done for you.”
Yours truly,
Lurlene Nestor
